So Hillary Clinton, her campaign sagging as it becomes clearer and clearer that she’s not going to get the Democratic nomination unless she can destroy her opponent, insists she would have quit Barack Obama’s Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago after hearing the allegedly “hateful” words of its pastor, Jeremiah Wright.

But wait a sec. Putting aside the matter of whether what Wright said was even “hateful,” this same Hillary Clinton chose the rabidly anti-semitic Rev. Billy Graham for spiritual mentor in her time of troubles during wayward hubby Bill’s impeachment scandal, and welcomed his offer of support for her senate and presidential bids. This, of course, is the same Billy Graham who was caught on tape telling President Nixon that he thought Jews had a “stranglehold” on the American media, and that if something weren’t “done about it,” the “country’s going down the drain.”

Now that certainly qualifies as hate speech, but it hasn’t bothered candidate Clinton a bit to cozy up to the Rev. Graham.

Well, maybe Clinton just “misspoke” when she said she chose the Rev. Graham as her spiritual mentor. (Isn’t that a lovely euphemism for lying, by the way?)

Misspeaking is her excuse for her latest whopper: the one about her combat experience in war-torn Bosnia.

Clinton, in an Iraq policy speech she gave last week aimed at trying to burnish her claim of 35 years of Washington experience, recalled a 1996 trip to the war-torn former province of Yugoslavia, where Serbs and Croats had been butchering each other and especially Muslims. As she told the tale last week:

"I certainly do remember that trip to Bosnia and ... there was a saying around the White House that if a place was too small, too poor, or too dangerous, the president couldn't go, so send the first lady. That's where we went. I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."

Brave woman!

Then came an embarrassing CBS news clip of that visit, which showed that there was no sniper fire, and that Clinton, who had brought along her daughter Chelsea and the comic Sinbad (apparently it was too dangerous for Bill, but not too dangerous for her daughter or the commedian!), and that all three of them had made a leisurely stroll from the plane with their military escorts and local hosts, even stopping to greet an 8-year-old girl who was on hand to welcome them.

A red-faced Clinton now claims she was “tired” and that she had “misspoken.”

Except that this isn’t the first time she’s told this particular whopper, as she insisted initially. She’s been a serial liar about the Bosnia visit and the mythic snipers.

All of which should raise grave doubts in the minds of primary voters in Pennsylvania and elsewhere about the veracity of her many other claims of foreign policy and White House executive experience—like her clearly and demonstrably inflated claim of having “helped to bring peace to Northern Ireland,” or her equally inflated claim of having "negotiated open borders to let fleeing refugees into safety from Kosovo," and also about her claim to have opposed the passage of the job-killing NAFTA treaty. (Recently revealed Clinton White House appointment records, pried lose by a public interest group Freedom of Information request, show that she in fact actively pushed for NAFTA passage.)

Now we all know that all politicians bend the truth, exaggerate their records, and yes, lie. But Clinton is now in danger of supplanting Al Gore, who was pilloried for exaggerating his role in “inventing” the Internet during his ill-fated run for the White House, as the season’s ace prevaricator. If she were somehow to manage to gain the Democratic nomination, Republicans and GOP candidate John McCain would have a field day with her at this point.

But we should not be surprised at this turn of events. After all, Hillary’s claim to White House experience and her assertion that she’s ready to assume the role of commander in chief “on day one” rests on her having been Bill’s consort and presidential “twofer.” And it was Bill, never one to be hobbled by the limitations of the truth, who famously claimed that a statement’s veracity depended on “what the meaning of `is’ is.”

Perhaps Hillary will eventually be saying the veracity of her Bosnian tall tale hinges on what the meaning of “snipe” is.

Now I recall that when I was a kid in summer camp, a snipe was a creature that counselors would send us off into the woods to capture in the dark. Like Clinton’s adventure with live fire, we campers eventually learned that the animal didn’t exist.

________________

DAVE LINDORFF is a Philadelphia-based journalist and columnist. His latest book is “The Case for Impeachment” (St. Martin’s Press, 2006, and now available in paperback edition). His work is available at www.thiscantbehappening.net

Comments

Maybe,we Hillary people BELIEVE and HOPE that she is the person to lead this nation.Maybe, after all the BS we have gone through with Obama supporters,the DNC,Howard Dean,we Clinton supporters and voters should spilt and vote against the hatred from the other side.

Obama can't reach over the total.

I'll continue to support with money and calling voters,because I BELIEVE and HOPE in Hillary not Obama.

What is wrong with you democrats?I'm voting for Obamo,but if Hillary gets the nomination I'll support her.You flip floppers that are whining about switching your vote to vote for McCain I got my doubt if you are even really democrats.Whining if clinton don't win I'll vote for Mcain. Wake-Up! You vote for Mcain you must love bush because John McCain is worse the Bush ever thought of being,keep the dem party strong don't let the republicans fool you again.

our two leaders in this campaign are running neck and neck races. They are essentially tied no matter how one tries to do the math.

Neither apparently has the horsepower to really make any dramatic gains. After two or three elections where our nominee was chosen by the few citizens of Iowa and NH, we seem to be surprised by a campaign that is headed for the convention and where the final choice will be decided by the wheeler-dealers within the mechanism of the superdelegates and perhaps a smoke-filled room somewhere out of sight--our sight at least.

This is the first presidential election where we on the net have finally been made aware of the actual differences between the separate states in the way they run their election process. If nothing else, it has been an education for us all. That is neither bad nor good--just really different.

The result, so far, of the apparent tie between our candidates, has produced war-like conditions between the two groups of supporters. The actual result at this particular moment in time is: Stalemate.

Eventually we will have a nominee. It is not the nominee at this time that is important, it is the person actually selected to fill the shoes of the President. Again, at the moment, it is a toss-up.

Sure, it is admittedly frustrating not to have our nominee a clear winner at this time.

The shame of this situation is what has produced the infighting between groups of supporters and with both teams using the arguments against either candidate straight out of the right-wing playbook.

The other team has McStupid as a nominee. Either of our candidates should be able to beat him with ease. Except for the infighting and damage to us all caused by that infighting.

How to come together? Dunno.

Right now we have a tie.

A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.

Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623

The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.